Quixtar/Amway Lawsuits

AUS suits page for introduction and reference

8/5/2003: Case No. 03-3290-CV, US District Court, Western Missouri

NITRO DISTRIBUTING, INC.; WEST PALM CONVENTION SERVICES, INC.; NETCO, INC.; SCHMITZ & ASSOCIATES, INC.; and U-CAN-II, INC. (plaintiffs are the tool's businesses of a Crown, a Double Diamond, and a Diamond IBOs)

vs.

ALTICOR, INC., AMWAY CORPORATION, and QUIXTAR, INC.

Summary: The tape and seminar businesses of Crown Kenny Stewart, Double Diamond Brig Hart, Diamond, and Charlie Schmitz sue Amway/Quixtar/Alticor for anti-trust violations related to the tools business. The plaintiffs allege that the Corporation conspired with and supported other IBOs in the take over and demise of plaintiff's motivational support businesses. 

The case is still on going. Alticor is trying to force arbitration.

2/2003 Case No. 02-02535 CA  pdf file of complaint pdf_icon.gif (914 bytes)
CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA 

U-CAN-II, INC., a Florida corporation, (Brig Hart's tape and seminar business)

vs.

RICHARD SETZER, SETZER INTERNATIONAL, INC. HAROLD GOOCH, JR.; GOOCH SUPPORT SYSTEMS, INC., GOOCH ENTERPRISES, INC., BILLY S. ("BILL") CHILDERS; TNT, INC., THOMAS D. ("TIM") FOLEY; T&C FOLEY, INC., STEVEN S. WOODS; G.F.I. INTERNATIONAL,INC.,PRO NET GLOBAL ASSOCIATION, INC., DON BRINDLEY; GLOBAL SUPPORT SERVICES, INC., PRO NET GLOBAL I, INC.

Summary: The tape and seminar business of Double Diamond Brig Hart, sues his Pro-net upline for anti-trust violations related to the tools business. The plaintiff alleges that his upline defendants conspired for the take over and demise of plaintiff's motivational support businesses. 

The case is still on going. Amway/Quixtar trying to force arbitration.

2/2003 Case No. 101CC4530    Complaint in .pdf format pdf_icon.gif (914 bytes)
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, DIVISION NO. 2

NITRO DISTRIBUTING, INC., WEST PALM CONVENTION SERVICES, INC. (Crown Kenny Stewart's tape and seminar business, Diamond Charlie Schmitz's tape and seminar business)

Vs.

JIMMY V. DUNN JIMMY V. DUNN & ASSOCIATES, INC. HAROLD GOOCH, JR.; GOOCH SUPPORT SYSTEMS, INC., GOOCH ENTERPRISES, INC., BILLY S. ("BILL") CHILDERS; TNT, INC., THOMAS D. ("TIM") FOLEY;T&C FOLEY, INC., STEVEN S. WOODS; G.F.I. INTERNATIONAL,INC.,PRO NET GLOBAL ASSOCIATION, INC., DON BRINDLEY; GLOBAL SUPPORT SERVICES, INC., PRO NET GLOBAL I, INC.,PARKER E. GRABILL, GRABILL ENTERPRISES, INC., ROBERT A. BLANCHARD

Summary: The tape and seminar businesses of Crown Distributor Kenny Stewart, and Diamond Charlie Schmitz sue their Pro-net upline for pyramiding, breach of contract and anit-trust violations related to the tools business. The plaintiffs allege that the upline defendants conspired for the take over and demise of plaintiffs' own motivational support businesses. 

The case is still on going. Amway/Quixtar trying to force arbitration.

10/2000 NO. 0 0 -0 1715
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS LYCOMING COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

ERIC and PATRICIA SCHEIBELER, (Emerald Distributors)

Vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION, QUIXTAR CORPORATION, JA-RI CORPORATION, RICHARD and HELEN DEVOS, JAY and "JANE DOE" VANANDEL, AMWAY DISTRIBUTOR'S ASSOCIATION, FRED and LINDA HARTEIS, HARTIES ENTERPRISES, INC.; LOUIS and JEAN MAZZANTE, LEE and LINDA FESSLER

Summary: Emerald distributor Eric Scheibeler sue Amway and their upline for fraud, misrepresentation, pyramiding, and breach of contract relating to the tools business and misrepresenting the profit potential of the Amway business. 

The dispute was forced into arbitration.

Eric Scheibler's story is told in his book "Mercants of Dection"

6/5/2000 00 2 08439 6 Superior Court of Washington for Pierce County

Amway Corporation

vs.

James B. Meade II, "Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell, Malanca, Peterson & Daheim P.L.L.C, (Attorneys for Heckart, Taylor, Schwartz and Scheibeler)

Summary: Defendants were attorneys in several cases opposing Amway. Amway claimed that the defendants released sealed case information from the Hekart case. Amway wanted the attorneys barred from ever working on Amway cases again. Defendants allege that the case was filed only to cast doubt on the defendants ability to keep discovery confidential and therefore stop the subpoenas on the financial records of Fred Harteis, Greg Duncan, Brad Duncan and Ron Puryear.

The depositions made extensive references to the embarrassing Amway "Postma memo".

Amway Emerald Eric Scheibeler was deposed in the case.

Amway could not prove sealed information was leaked and lost the case.

8/2000 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BUCHANAN COUNTY, MISSOURI

NETCO, INC.; SCHMITZ & ASSOCIATES, INC.; JOANNE SCHMITZ d/b/a SCHMITZ,& CO.; and R K KELM CO., L.L.C. (Diamond Charlie Schmitz)

vs.

JIMMY DUNN, JIMMY V. DUNN & ASSOCIATES, INC, HAROLD GOOCH, JR., GOOCH SUPPORT SYSTEMS, INC., WILLIAM CHILDERS, TNT, INC., JIM EVANS, MICHAEL P. ABBEY, ABBEY CORPORATION, GERALD PRESSLEY, PRESSLEY CORPORATION, PRO NET GLOBAL ASSOCIATION, GLOBAL SUPPORT SERVICES, INC.

Summary: Diamond Charlie Schmitz sue their Pro-net upline for tortuous Interference of contracts, , breach of contract and anit-trust violations related to the tools business. The plaintiffs allege that the upline defendants conspired for the take over and demise of plaintiffs' own motivational support businesses. 

12/29/98 No. C-98-710-SD US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Elizabeth Lavoie and John Lavoie, (Ruby Direct)

vs.

Dexter Yager, Yager Enterprises, Continuing Distributor Education, InterNET Services Corporation, Network Distribution Marketing Technologies, Network of Business Opportunity Entrepreneurs, National Business Opportunity Entrepreneurs, Donald Storms and Ruth Storms, Storms & Associates, Frank Mazzeo and Joan Mazzeo, F & J Enterprises and Mazzeo Enterprises

Summary: Ruby directs Elizabeth Lavoie and John Lavoie sue their upline Frank Mazzeo when Mazzeo went around the Lavoie's and cut them off from the tools business profits. Cited in the complaint were unfair trade practices, illegal chain distribution scheme, fraudulent misconduct, breach of contract, interference with advantageous relations, securities fraud, and RICO. The complaint highlights the working of the Yager system and is a good description of the progression a distributor makes through the system.

12/98 Team Resources vs. Fish, Andrews U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division

Team Resources, Inc.: A corporation incorporated under the laws of the state of Nevada. It's shareholders, Joe Morrison, Randy Councill, Ron Green, David Roberts, Kelly Robbins, Victor Brook, Donald May, John Neely, Tony Cutaia, Richard Powell, Richard Werner, Robert Schmanski, Robert Price, David Metcalf, Warren Bird, Tim Doucet, Larry Rogers, Herbert Hamilton and Dr. T.M. Hughes, are all Amway distributors

vs.

TED FISH, FISH ASSOCIATES, ANDY ANDREWS, ROBERT D. SMITH and FIRST IMAGE, INC.

Summary: Plaintiffs charged defendants with breach of contract in speaking engagements. Defendants broke contracts to speak at functions since plaintiffs broke from the Yager system and defendants did not want to jeopardize their standing in the Yager organization.

12/98 NO. 98-2-15585-0 SEA Superior Court of the state of Washington for King County

GARY TAYLOR and KATHY TAYLOR, Gold Directs

vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION, SAMIR THAPIT and THERESA D. ATTALAH; BRADLEY and JULIE DUNCAN, WORLD WIDE GROUP, L.L.C., ATTALAH MOTIVATION, INC., ATTALAH ENTERPRISES, INC., ATTALAH INTERNATIONAL, INC., DUNCAN INTERNATIONAL, INC., DUNCAN MOTIVATION, INC.

Summary: Plaintiffs claimed that their business was unjustly taken away from them due to the urgings of their World Wide Dreambuilder's upline. Defendants were charged with intentional interference with business expectancy, violation of chain distributor's law (pyramiding), criminal profiteering, unfair business practices, and conversion.

10/13/98 File No. 1:98-CV-726   Summary of case
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Amway Corporation

vs.

Proctor & Gamble, Sidney Schwartz, Kenneth Lowndes, Dinsmore & Shohl, LLP

Summary: Amway charges P&G with defamation and tortuous interference with business relations since P&G accused Amway of being an "illegal pyramid scheme". Amway alleges that P&G conspired with internet web sites to defame Amway. P&G presented 1603 pages of evidence as to why the business could be considered a pyramid scheme.

In the case P&G commissioned the "Blakey Report" written by G. Robert Blakey Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School. Mr. Blakey was instrumental in writing the RICO laws. The reported concentrated on comparing the characteristics of organized crime to Amway and their distributor organizations.

P&G, and Dinsmore were dismissed 10/14/2001 from the case on Summary Judgement. Sidney Schwartz settled out of court and has not been heard from again.

Read Judge Bell's order and partial judgement.

8/26/98 Case Number: CV 98-511 Circuit Court of Lauderdale County, Alabama

David Woods and Jan Woods

vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION, BILL BRITT and PEGGY BRITT, PAUL MILLER and DEBBIE MILLER, TOM COOPER and CONNIE COOPER, BARRY GROVE and PAT GROVE, STEVE LUCKS and JULIE LUCKS, PETE LAMBERT and PEGGY LAMBERT

Summary: Plaintiffs charge fraud with the tools system, breach of contract in Amway enforcing its rules, civil conspiracy in the tools business, tortuous interference with business relationships, breach of implied contract, breach of fiduciary duty.

6/22/98 No. 98-17491 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS 190th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Jeffrey and Cecilia Musgrove, Emerald distributors

vs.

Amway Corporation , Amway Distributors Association, JA-RI Corporation, Dennis James, Rich DeVos, Jay Van Andel
Dick DeVos, Steve Van Andel, Doug DeVos, Bob Kerkstra, Dexter Yager, Ind. And d/b/a Yager Enterprises and Internet Services Corp., Jeff Yager, Donald R. Wilson, Ind. And d/b/a Wow International and Wilson Enterprises, Inc., Randy and Valorie Haugen, Ind. And d/b/a Freedom Associates, Inc. Freedom Tools, Inc. And All Star Production Co., John Sims, Ind. And d/b/a Sims Enterprises, Randy and Susan Walker, Ind. And d/b/a Walker International, Mark and Martha Hughes, Bill and Alyssa Bergfeld, Ind. And d/b/a Bergfeld International, Inc.
Lisa Bergfeld, Jody Victor, Ind.

Summary: Plaintiffs contend their business was destroyed by an arbitrary market division approved by Jody Victor, head of the Amway Distributor's Association. This case in intertwined with the case below and the Morrison case.

5/22/98 NO. 95-17491 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS 190TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

DONALD and JACKIE GRIFFITH VERNON and BONNIE HOLQUIN, BRENDA and WILLIAM L. CHRISTIAN, DONALD and LINDA WEAD, BYRON and KENDRA HALLMARK, and TED and MYRENE MCDANIELS

vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION, ET AL. 

Summary: This case is a fraud case relating to the Defendants' use of the Amway Corporation to enhance their own economic self-interests. Plaintiffs seek recovery for damages incurred as a result of Defendants':

1. Fraudulent inducement in causing Plaintiffs to participate in Defendants' illegal scheme to purchase and sell motivational tapes and tickets to Amway events;

2. Conspiracy to fraudulently induce Plaintiffs to enter into an agreement to execute what they believed to be the Amway Sales Plan;

3. Violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act;

4. Violations of the Texas State Bribery Act;

5. Negligent misrepresentations regarding what the Plaintiffs believed to be the Amway Sales Plan;

6. Tortious interference with Plaintiffs' "down-line" distributors;

7. Defamatory statements about Plaintiffs to their "down-line" distributors;

8. Breach of contract; and

9. Breach of fiduciary duties.

1/6/98 Morrison et. al vs. Amway et al. District Court of Harris County, Texas

DR. JOE AND DAWN MORRISON, KELLY ROBBINS, RANDY AND JANET COUNCILL, DAN AND HELEN HIGGINS, RON & KAREN GREEN, VICTOR & CATHY BROOK, DR. MARION & JEAN MCMURTREY, DAN & HELEN HIGGINS, DR. T. M. & CYNTHIA HUGHES, RICHMOND EAGLE CORP., DAVE & ROSE ROBERTS, DR. RICHARD & LINDA WERNER, TONY & MARYANN CUTAIA, WARREN & DONNA BIRD, TOM & KYE YEAMAN, and WADE & DEBBIE MCKAY

vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION, RICH DeVOS, JAY VANANDEL, DICK DeVOS, STEVE VAN ANDEL, DOUG DeVOS, BOB KERKSTRA, JA-RI CORPORATION, DEXTER YAGER, INDIVIDUALLY, YAGER ENTERPRISES AND INTERNET SERVICES CORPORATION, JEFF YAGER, DONALD R. WILSON, WOW INTERNATIONAL AND WILSON ENTERPRISES, INC., RANDY & VALORIE HAUGEN, FREEDOM ASSOCIATES, INC., FREEDOM TOOLS, INC, ALL STAR PRODUCTION COMPANY, JOHN SIMS, SIMS ENTERPRISES, RANDY & SUSAN WALKER, WALKER, INTERNATIONAL, MARK & MARTHA HUGHES, BILL & ALYSSA BERGFELD, BERGFELD INTERNATIONAL, INC., JODY VICTOR, JEVI CORPORATION, MARK CORDNER, BILLY ZEOLI, GOSPEL FILMS, DENNIS JAMES

Summary: 29 distributors, most at the Emerald level, filed a lawsuit that lays bare Amway's ugliest secrets

This lawsuit alleges that:

The defendant distributors make the majority of their income selling motivational tools rather than Amway products

Distributors in the defendant's downlines are coerced into spending money on tapes and functions by being told that they will have no chance of succeeding unless they do so

Tools profits are used to control and coerce downline distributors, and those who ask questions or refuse to play the game risk having their businesses destroyed

Emerald and Diamond distributors in the defendant Diamond's downlines are created through the manipulation of the Amway points system, and not through individual achievement

These blatant violations of Amway's rules by the defendant Diamonds is done not only with Amway's knowledge, but with Amway's active support and assistance.

After all most 6 years the suit is still tied up in forced arbitration.

7/24/97 Case #3:97CV1509JCH US DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT  

GERALD HAYDEN; EDDA HAYDEN, (Direct distributors)

vs.

DEXTER YAGER; YAGER ENTERPRISES, CONTINUING DISTRIBUTOR EDUCATION, INTERNET SERVICES CORPORATION, NETWORK; DISTRIBUTION MARKETING TECHNOLOGIES, DOWNEAST NETWORKING, SERVICES, INC, NETWORK OF BUSINESS, OPPORTUNITY ENTREPRENEURS; NATIONAL, BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY ENTREPRENEURS, DON WILSON and NANCY WILSON, COLOMBO DISALVATORE and KAREN, DISALVATORE, DISALVATORE NETWORK MARKETING, AMWAY CORP., AMWAY DISTRIBUTOR ASSOCIATION, ; EDWARD POSTMA, DAVID KRUER

Summary: In this lawsuit the Haydens wished to sell tapes and Amway product at prices other than those dictated by the Yager organization. The Haydens were blackballed from all tools systems and could not find a supplier of tools. Although Amway said they would supply names of other diamonds from whom they could purchase support materials, Amway never supplied the information. Haydens claimed conspiracy to restrict trade, securities sales violations, and RICO.

4/8/1997 CASE NO. 97-349-CIV-J-20B US DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA

BRIG HART and LITA HART, U-CAN-II, INC., B&L HART ENTERPRISES, INC.(Double Diamond Brig Hart)

vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION, DEXTER YAGER, INTERNET SERVICES, RICHARD SETZER, SETZER INTERNATIONAL, INC., HAROLD GOOCH, Jr., GOOCH SUPPORT SYSTEMS, INC., WILLIAM CHILDERS, TNT of CHARLOTTE, INC., ANGELO D'AMICO, D'AMICO INTERNATIONAL, TIM FOLEY, FOLEY & CO.; JAMES D. HAYES, JR., FREEDOM EXPRESS, INC., CARLOS M. MARIN, JR., MARIN & ASSOCIATES, INC., JOE RODRIQUEZ

Summary: In this lawsuit Hart is accusing other Diamond distributors in his upline and downline of cutting him out of the flow of tools--and tools money--through his line of sponsorship.
Hart later drops suit in May of 1998 but only to file new suits in 2003.

3/28/96 FILE NO.: 96-RC5C-264 IN THE STATE COURT OF RICHMOND COUNTY, GEORGIA  

Don and Sue Ellen Touchton

vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION; DEXTER, YAGER, YAGER ENTERPRISES; HAL GOOCH AND SUSAN GOOCH; AND SAM
FLANERY AND JACALYN FLANERY

Summary: Distributors accuse their upline Emeralds (Flanery) of "going around them", as well as RICO, fraud, breach of contract and pyramiding violations.

7/20/94 Civil Action No. 94-4615 US District Court Eastern Pennsylvania

John and Stacy Hanrahan, Brian Bohrer, Mark and Lori Mensack, and other similar plaintiffs (Class action complaint)

vs.

Amway Corporation, Bill Britt, Dexter Yager and their motivational companies.

Summary: This is a class action brought to remedy defendants' violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § l, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., and state common law arising from defendants' efforts to build their vast Amway sales organizations through the perpetration of fraud and restraint of competition. The fraudulent, deceitful and coercive behavior of defendants, as described herein, continues to cause substantial injury to the members of the Class, for which the Class seeks monetary and injunctive relief.

6/28/91 Case No.: 91-72761-CK, STATE OF MICHIGAN THE CIRCUIT COURT KENT COUNTY
Other documents about the case 1.5meg

Joan Baker, Shirlee Michaels (Diamond distributor before divorce and splitting their with her husband business making her an emerald)

vs.

Amway Corporation

Summary: The case was first dismissed in 1992. In 1994 the state appeals court overturned the ruling. Plaintiffs sued Amway for breach of contract in allowing the removal of two profitable downline legs. Amway at a whim waved its own "6-month inactivity rule", which was expressly put n place to prevent such moves thereby protecting distributor's income potential. Amway cited Rule 4 violations allowing the transfer but none such violations were proven in court.

Plaintiffs won the action in jury trial and were awarded $580,000.

1996 - Canadian Federal Court of Appeals (see Canadian Fraud page)

The government of Canada

vs.

Amway Corporation

Summary: The Canadian government challenged Amway's deduction of fines for its criminal conviction of tax fraud. The court ruled that Amway could not treat the fines paid from their 1983 criminal conviction of tax evasion as a tax deductible expense.

1989 

The government of Canada

vs.

Amway Corporation

Summary: Amway, with its corporate headquarters in Ada, Mich., had been evading duties and taxes by using false invoices to misrepresent the value of its products being shipped across the border.

Key documents to the fraud were provided by whistle blower, Dorothy Edgar. Edgar was the executive secretary to Edward Engel, Amway's vice-president of finance. In late 1977, Engel learned of the fraudulent practices and urged his company to disclose to Revenue Canada what was happening. Amway refused and as a result Engel and Edgar resigned in January 1979.

Amway pleaded guilty to criminal fraud for tax evasion in 1983. This case was to collect the back duties, fees, and fines that had been evaded. The Canadian department of Revenue claimed Amway owed C$148 million. The case was eventually settled for $45 million.

7/17/86 Case No. 6:86-1898-3 US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION

RICK SETZER AND SUE LYNN SETZERSETZER INTERNATIONAL, INC., AMBASSADORS INTERNATIONAL, INC. (Setzer was a triple diamond)

vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION, RICHARD M. DEVOS AND JAY VANANDEL

Summary: This lawsuit, filed by Triple Diamond Rick Setzer, accuses Amway of intentionally interfering (by means of, among other things, distribution of the aforementioned "Directly Speaking" tapes) with Setzer's ability to profit from his tools business. His charges against Amway include: Non-payment of bonus moneys, intentional interference with contractual relations, intentional infliction of emotional distress, racketeering breach of contract, and fraud. This case is very interesting as a system king pin fights Amway back to protect his tools business and accuses Amway of the same abuse the system king pins, such as misrepresentation of income. The outcome of the case was as follows:

Plaintiff's counts VI, VII, VII and IX were dismissed.

Amway's counterclaims were all dismissed.

The jury found that the Setzers were entitled to recover the bonus money that was withheld, plus money for various awards and trips, and "quantum meruit," but not for anything else.

The Setzers were awarded a judgement of $160,938.72.

The funniest part is after all of this Setzer is still a distributor.

5/19/1986 US Federal Trade Commission

vs.

Amway Corporation

Summary: A 1979 Commission decision resolved FTC charges that Amway's claims about the amount of money distributors are likely to earn had the capacity to deceive potential distributors. The order accompanying that decision prohibits Amway from misrepresenting the amount of profit, earnings or sales its distributors are likely to achieve. The order also requires that whenever Amway makes above-average earnings or sales claims, it must also dis close clearly and conspicuously either the average earnings of all distributors or the percent of distributors who actually earn the amount claimed.

According to a complaint filed with the proposed consent decree, Amway violated the 1979 order by placing an advertisement in newspapers across the country that represented the earnings of distributors without the required disclosures. The complaint charged that the 1983 ad, which offered Amway distributorships, contained earnings and sales claims that were higher than the average income actually earned in any recent year. In addition, the complaint charged, Amway violated the 1979 order by failing to include in its ad clear and conspicuous dis closures of the average earnings or sales of all distributors in any recent year or the percent of distributors who actually achieved the results claimed.

Under the consent decree, Amway is prohibited from making claims about above-average distributor earnings or sales unless it makes the required disclosures about actual earnings or sales. This consent decree is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the company that it violated the law. Amway is fined $100,000.

9/85 - File No. G85-832-CA1 

 Werner and Erna Gommeringer (Canadian Crown Distributors)

vs.

 Amway Corporation

Summary: The Gommeringer's crown distributorship was terminated for not paying their $12 renewal fee on time despite the fact that Amway had a policy of accepting renewals late for an additional $4 fee. The Grommeringers claim to have paid the fees in September of the year before they were notified their distributorship was terminated. Plaintiffs claim Amway incited other distributors to file "419s" complaints against them. The bad blood might have come from Amway failing to implement their promised "Income Preservation Plan" to protect Canadian distributors from dollar inflation. Apparently the plaintiffs were also considering working other businesses with which Amway disagreed.

3/29/1985 - Case N0. 85 2 01841 4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PIERCE

MICHAEL and DARLENE HECKART

vs.

AMWAY CORPORATION, DEXTER YAGER and BIRDIE YAGER, WILLIAM BRITT and MARGRET BRITT, REX RENFROW and BETTY JO RENFROW, JAMES BROOS and BETTY JEAN BROOKS

Summary: The Heckart's charge the defendants with fraud, misrepresentation of income, negligence and business opportunity fraud. Plaintiffs sold house at the advice of upline and eventually filed for bankruptcy.
The case was settled out of court.

1984 - Cairns vs. Amway United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio

Cairns (lawsuit filed by some 77 couples and individuals who were Amway dealers in Cincinnati and surrounding areas of Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana.)

vs.

Amway corporation, Van Andel, DeVos, distributors organizations (Yager, Britt, Renfrow, et al.) and some of the distributor's non-Amway businesses (American Multimedia, Inc., an so).

Summary: In the suit the distributors claim they were told by they had to buy the business support materials if they wanted to keep their growing business or advance within the distributor organization. Diamond Distributor Randy Siciliano was terminated by Amway for his role in coerced sales of tape and seminars but later he was reinstated.

8/1984 - Bartlett vs. Amway Orange County California Superior Court

Jeff and Grisell Bartlett - (Direct distributor)

vs.

Amway, Patterson

Summary: The Bartlett's with the advice of their upline inventory loaded and "bought" their direct distributor status. Later after not being able to sell the products their upline and Amway refused to buy back the excess products they had overstocked The Patterson's, Bartlett's upline, instructed the Bartlett's downline to work directly with the Pattersons. This left the Bartletts unable to liquidate their remaining product stocks. Noted in the suit were the fact that Amway's 10 customer rule and 70% rule were not enforced, albeit being the principle reasons why the FTC did not rule Amway to be an illegal pyramid scheme in its 1979 decision.

1983 - Supreme Court of Ontario, Canada

The government of Canada

vs.

Amway Corporation

Summary: Amway, with its corporate headquarters in Ada, Mich., was charged with evading duties and taxes by using false invoices to misrepresent the value of its products being shipped across the border.

Amway Corporation and Amway of Canada Ltd plead guilty to tax evasion and pay C$25M fine for criminal fraud. Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel plea bargained to dismiss criminal indictments against them. Canada still sought C$148M in back customs duties, taxes and penalties.

7/28/82 Case 589806 State of Wisconsin Circuit Court Milwaukee - Wisconsin AG Press Release

State of Wisconsin - (Attorney General - Bruce Craig)

vs.

Amway Corporation, Wayland C Behnke, Dean M Pliss, Benedetio Lanza, John Haugner, World Wide Diamond

Summary: The Wisconsin AG charges numerous Wisconsin Amway distributors with unrealistic and exaggerated income claims as well as failure to disclose the identity of Amway and the nature of the opportunity being offered. An analysis of Wisconsin State direct distributors revealed that the averaged losses of $918/year.

3/25/75- 5//8/79 US Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

vs.

Amway Corporation

Summary: Amway is charged with price fixing, misrepresentation of income claims, and pyramiding claims.

Amway was ordered to cease price fixing, and misrepresentations of income. The pyramiding charge was dropped due to supposed enforcement of Amway's "buy back" rule, the 70% rule, and the ten­customer rule.

Back to the home page